People don't vote when candidates don't give them a reason to vote.

You are wise. It would be much better for my mental health if I did the same.

Didn't you hear MTG? This wasn't God's will, it was weather manipulation by Jews and liberals.

Blaming all Latinos because a bit less than half of them voted for Trump is racist. I agree that it is hard to sympathize with Trump voters when they hit the FO stage of FAFO, but blaming an entire ethnic group for the votes of some of its members is bullshit.

I posted evidence, shithead. You choosing to ignore it doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

Who was the better candidate? The one who persuaded more people to vote for them. That is the candidate's job.

Go ahead. Keep running on "Vote for me. I'm not quite as bad as my opponent." Let me know how that works out.

Unsurprisingly, you completely miss the point. Nominating the somewhat less shitty candidate will not get people to vote.

I won't claim to speak for all 6 million, but a lot of 2020 Biden voters did in fact decide that Trump was the better option in 2024, particularly Hispanic and Black voters. The rest apparently decided that neither was worth voting for.

Ah, yes, because there was no rightward shift between 2020 and 2024 among historically Democratic constituencies. Are you being deliberately obtuse, or are you really this stupid?

It would be a , lot quicker if you just yelled FAKE NEWS! Because that's exactly what (and who) you sound like.

Keep blaming voters instead of demanding better candidates. I'm sure that will continue working out really well for you.

And your evidence that all of these non-voters would have voted for Harris is? I'll wait.

If Everyone Had Voted, Harris Still Would Have Lost

Identify a single state where this made a difference. Try blaming your shitty candidates, not the voters. www.nytimes.com/2025/06/26/u...

If Everyone Had Voted, Harris Still Would Have Lost

You've got it exactly backwards. People who have a stake in this cannot afford the consequences of the Dems' decades-long rightward drift. And there is zero evidence supporting your claim that people not voting hurt your preferred Republican-lite candidates. www.nytimes.com/2025/06/26/u...

Since liberals have by and large bought into neoliberal economics, I think you are the one who is confused. But it's easy to get confused if you're trapped in a centrist echo chamber.

Not really sure how you get to that from very substantive policy differences.

Perhaps, though that hasn't been my experience as the father of a trans woman; the libs I know have been very welcoming to her. But obviously my experience is with a small sample and your experience may well be different.

Liberals have most definitely *not* been "pushing for single payer". Obama's press secretary publicly mocked progressives for trying to push single payer.

That is objectively, demonstrably wrong.

No, its not. It saying "No, the half a shit sandwich you're offering is not enough of an alternative to the whole shit sandwich the Republicans are offering." "Vote for us; we'll kill you more slowly" has not been a winning strategy for the Dems.

I'm a late Boomer. When I have discussions with libs my age or older about things like single payer or student loan forgiveness, they just cannot seem to understand that the economy has changed since we were 18, and that it is now nearly impossible for young people to be middle class.

You're very defensive.

But that's a problem because it allows media and less informed voters to conflate issues. This is what allows right wingers to call the center-right Democratic Party "socialist" with a straight face.

You don't need to be hostile. We're having a conversation.

If you're a Warren Dem, I think you probably fit comfortably into the progressive (but not the leftist) camp. It is a spectrum; I find myself somewhere between social democrat and democratic socialist, but the differences are real.

You think that being able to afford housing and healthcare are trivial issues that people have just been propagandized into treating as important?

I think the key differences are on economic policy. Libs tend to be more centrist and have largely bought into the neo-liberal policy that has led to our massive inequality. Progressives favor more redistributive policy, such as single-payer healthcare, UBI, and so on.

Self-described liberals are as often hostile to progressives and leftists as leftists are to liberals. The problem is that many liberals are older and more affluent. While they support many of the same social positions as those to their left, there is significant disagreement on economic issues

To MAGAts, "communist" means "anything I don't like"